Tom Lane wrote:
I think we could also error out if we cannot create at least one
listen socket for each entry in listen_addresses (instead of at
least one overall).
No; that will break cases that don't need to break.
Which cases would that be? If you specify a host name and it doesn't
Peter Eisentraut [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Not ignoring errors is one of the staples of PostgreSQL. What you are
proposing here sounds entirely like a MySQL design plan. Maybe that is
newbie-friendly in your mind, but I really doubt that. I agree that we
do not want to force people to
I wrote:
The least thing it should do is error out if *no* TCP/IP port could
be created while listen_addresses is set.
It's doing that now, and that should guard against the most common
problem, namemly the port already being occupied (since all TCP/IP
listen sockets use the same port).
Peter Eisentraut [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Reading the comments in StreamServerPort, it seems the only problem we
can't go fatal error everywhere is that on some systems the IPv4 and
IPv6 sockets fight each other when bind() is called. For the other
failure modes, it seems that no such
During a recent training session I was reminded about a peculiar
misbehavior that recent PostgreSQL releases exhibit when the TCP port
they are trying to bind to is occupied:
LOG: could not bind IPv4 socket: Address already in use
HINT: Is another postmaster already running on port 5432? If
Peter Eisentraut said:
During a recent training session I was reminded about a peculiar
misbehavior that recent PostgreSQL releases exhibit when the TCP port
they are trying to bind to is occupied:
LOG: could not bind IPv4 socket: Address already in use
HINT: Is another postmaster already
Andrew Dunstan wrote:
IIRC, in previous versions any bind failure was fatal, but in 8.0 we
decided to be slightly more forgiving and only bail out if we failed
to bind at all.
I realize that, but I would like to know where that bright idea came
from in violation of all other principles of
At 2005-06-28 15:14:29 +0200, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I recall that it had something to do with IPv6, but I'm not sure.
Under Linux, if you bind to AF_INET6/::0, a subsequent bind to AF_INET/0
will fail, but the IPv4 address is also bound by the first call, and the
program will accept IPv4
Peter Eisentraut wrote:
Andrew Dunstan wrote:
IIRC, in previous versions any bind failure was fatal, but in 8.0 we
decided to be slightly more forgiving and only bail out if we failed
to bind at all.
I realize that, but I would like to know where that bright idea came
from in
On Tue, Jun 28, 2005 at 03:14:29PM +0200, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
Andrew Dunstan wrote:
IIRC, in previous versions any bind failure was fatal, but in 8.0 we
decided to be slightly more forgiving and only bail out if we failed
to bind at all.
I realize that, but I would like to know where
Alvaro Herrera wrote:
If the TCP socket is used we can still bind to the Unix-domain
socket, no?
If I configured a TCP/IP socket, what good does a Unix-domain socket do
me?
--
Peter Eisentraut
http://developer.postgresql.org/~petere/
---(end of
Andrew Dunstan wrote:
see http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2004-03/msg00679.php
Well, with once release of field experience behind me I'd like to
revisit this idea. Who would actually be hurt by generating an error
here like it used to do?
--
Peter Eisentraut
Peter Eisentraut [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
During a recent training session I was reminded about a peculiar
misbehavior that recent PostgreSQL releases exhibit when the TCP port
they are trying to bind to is occupied:
LOG: could not bind IPv4 socket: Address already in use
HINT: Is
Tom Lane wrote:
What behavior are you proposing, exactly?
The least thing it should do is error out if *no* TCP/IP port could be
created while listen_addresses is set.
--
Peter Eisentraut
http://developer.postgresql.org/~petere/
---(end of
Peter Eisentraut [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Tom Lane wrote:
What behavior are you proposing, exactly?
The least thing it should do is error out if *no* TCP/IP port could be
created while listen_addresses is set.
That might be reasonable --- I think right now we only die if we
couldn't create
Tom Lane wrote:
Peter Eisentraut [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Tom Lane wrote:
What behavior are you proposing, exactly?
The least thing it should do is error out if *no* TCP/IP port could be
created while listen_addresses is set.
That might be reasonable --- I think
16 matches
Mail list logo
